Article Text

PDF
Review
Transradial access: lessons learned from cardiology
  1. Brian M Snelling1,
  2. Samir Sur1,
  3. Sumedh Subodh Shah1,
  4. Megan M Marlow1,
  5. Mauricio G Cohen2,
  6. Eric C Peterson1
  1. 1Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, USA
  2. 2Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Eric C Peterson, Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Miami School of Medicine Miami, Florida 33136, USA; ericpete{at}med.miami.edu

Abstract

Innovations in interventional cardiology historically predate those in neuro-intervention. As such, studying trends in interventional cardiology can be useful in exploring avenues to optimise neuro-interventional techniques. One such cardiology innovation has been the steady conversion of arterial puncture sites from transfemoral access (TFA) to transradial access (TRA), a paradigm shift supported by safety benefits for patients. While neuro-intervention has unique anatomical challenges, the access itself is identical. As such, examining the extensive cardiology literature on the radial approach has the potential to offer valuable lessons for the neuro-interventionalist audience who may be unfamiliar with this body of work. Therefore, we present here a report, particularly for neuro-interventionalists, regarding the best practices for TRA by reviewing the relevant cardiology literature. We focused our review on the data most relevant to our audience, namely that surrounding the access itself. By reviewing the cardiology literature on metrics such as safety profiles, cost and patient satisfaction differences between TFA and TRA, as well as examining the technical nuances of the procedure and post-procedural care, we hope to give physicians treating complex cerebrovascular disease a broader data-driven understanding of TRA.

  • cardiology
  • neuro-intervention
  • transradial access
  • review

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Contributors All authors contributed to the conception, literature review and drafting of the manuscript. MGC and ECP provided manuscript oversight and administrative support. All authors critically reviewed the manuscript and approved its final submission.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.